Joe Biden: Dem Rivals "Not Making Sense" On Bhutto Murder

[oberliner]

Council Bluffs, Iowa - Presidential candidate Senator Joe Biden took the occasion of the assassination of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto to chide his Democratic rivals as too inexperienced to be president and to tout his own foreign policy credentials.

"Observe what's been going on in Pakistan and you'll see not many candidates have spoken out," Biden said. "And those few who have spoken don't make a lot of sense."

Biden made his remarks Thursday night to an audience of about 150 supporters gathered at the Elks Lodge in this small city abutting Nebraska.

Biden didn't single out any of his rivals by name in deriding their statements on Pakistan. But calling "nuclear-riddled" Pakistan an "emerging, urgent crisis," the veteran Delaware senator suggested that among the Democratic contenders he alone was best suited to deal with dangerous global affairs.

In a post-event interview with The Huffington Post, Biden at first refused to specify which candidate he was referring to when he said they weren't making sense on Pakistan. He noted that front-runners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom issued brief statements earlier in the day lamenting Bhutto's murder, were "both good people" but didn't have his breadth of foreign policy experience.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/27/joe-biden-dem-rivals-no_n_78511.html

[LittleClarkie]

1. One could say he is politicizing the issue too

but I also find he has credibility in such a statement.

[gateley]

4. Biden's first statement was really just a tribute to Bhutto and a plea for calm

in Pakistan.

In this article, he was at a campaign event.

To be fair to them all, the media was the most guilty of putting the political spin on this.

[babylonsister]

2. Sure, Joe. Don't get too cocky; it might bite you in the butt. And since

Richardson has equivalent experience, if not more, what do you say about his stand on Pakistan? Substance, Joe, give us some substance.

[1corona4u]

5. And yet, it was Richardson who make the most

questionable statement on asking Musharraf to step down. In a stable country, that might not be an issue but as I said before, in a country that has;


1. Radicals
2. Al Qaeda
3. NUKES

It's smarter to do the prudent thing. As biden said to Chris about what to do next; "steady and clear".

[babylonsister]

6. I realize that, which is why I think Biden should address what Richardson said. nt

[1corona4u]

7. He answered that. Did you follow the link??

When further pressed on the issue, Biden singled out second-tier candidate Bill Richardson as an example of a candidate putting forth simplistic responses to the Pakistani crisis. "Richardson said that Musharraf should step down and make way for a coalition government," Biden said. "But what coalition? There isn't any. What's he talking about?"

[NI4NI]

10. I wouldn't put any bets on

the PPP and Bhutto's followers having anything to do with a coalition with Mushroom's government any time soon.

[1corona4u]

3. He's right.

They don't make sense. He was also careful not to demean them. Notice how many times they "pressed" him for the answers? Fucking media.

[TwilightGardener]

8. What specifically did they say that didn't make sense, Joe?

[1corona4u]

11. Read the link, if your able...

The answers you seek are there.

[Melinda]

9. Topic: Biden calls Hilary, Edwards, and Obama senseless!

So that's how it feels to miscontrue statements and fan flames!! :woohoo:

[depakid]

12. "best suited to deal with dangerous global affairs."

Yep- his ramblings on the Sunday shows for the past 5 or 6 years confirm that emphatically.

[1corona4u]

13. Yep. they sure do.

Whenever there's a foreign policy question, who you gonna' call; Joe Biden...it's happened, apparently, like 10,000 times in the last 35 years...

Here's a bonus for you;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9ZyZCsRJyM&feature=user

[depakid]

14. If the choice were between he and Obama, I might agree

[1corona4u]

15. Whatever....

You think what you want, and the rest of us will look to the person, who we KNOW has been right all along.

[depakid]

16. "Right all along?"

That's not how I remember it....

In July 2002, at the first Senate hearing on Iraq, then-Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Joe Biden pledged his allegiance to Bush's war. Ever since, the blunt-spoken Biden has seized every opportunity to dismiss antiwar critics within his own party, vocally denouncing Bush's handling of the war while doggedly supporting the war effort itself. Biden carried this message into the Kerry campaign as the candidate's closest foreign policy confidant, and a few days after announcing his own intention to run for the presidency in 2008, he gave a major speech at the Brookings Institution in which he criticized rising calls for withdrawal as a "gigantic mistake."


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050829/berman

[Munch]

18. Hey, Depakid...

Your post crossed mine. Likewise your thoughts.

Joe Biden has NOT been right all along. Not even close.

Thanks for backing me up on this.

Oh, wow. If Biden had been right on Iraq... he would have the nomination. He would have my vote and millions of others. Edwards, Obama and Clinton would be also rans. In my dreams?

I guess Dennis Kucinich shows us what you get for being RIGHT about issues of war and peace.

Ah, well.

[depakid]

21. Some posters have short memories it seems

As one of Bush's pimps for the war on Iraq, Biden supported precisely what he links the current crisis to:

The administration's poor management and near desertion of Afghanistan.

Trying to have it both ways, I guess.

[1corona4u]

19. We're talking about Pakistan, moron.

[KaptBunnyPants]

31. Biden doesn't need your help getting people not to vote for him.

He's doing fine on his own.

[Munch]

17. Last night I read Obamian's post from Larry King Live...

the transcript of John Edwards and Barack Obama responding to Wolf Blitzer's questions:

How would you handle the situation in Pakistan -- and what would you do re continuing U.S. aid?

I thought Obama, in particular, made exceptional sense of the situation. He had a keen grasp of the issues, the danger, and what we must do to avert further catastrophic events. That Obama dares to challenge the conventional wisdom which Biden represents...

well, let's see -- would the war in Iraq have happened without the IWR? How did Joe Biden's "breadth of foreign policy experience" inform that particular vote? With all his knowledge and expertise, why didn't he stand up in 2002 and say:

NO -- no, Mr. President -- we have limited resources. We need to keep our focus on Afghanistan AND on Pakistan which we KNOW has nuclear weapons... and btw does anyone remember Kashmir?

Nuts. Barack Obama makes perfect sense on this issue. His rhetoric at least. Clean and articulate, in Joe Biden's own words. Now: Obama's votes to continue funding the military status quo in Iraq... another matter altogether. Actions, alas, speak louder...

But thank you. This post gave me the impetus to scratch Joe Biden off my potential list of candidates. His experience hasn't really helped... now has it... and I wouldn't be touting it or blowing my horn with Bhutto's body barely cold. Total turnoff.

Everyone who voted for the IWR is ipso facto a part of the scenario that resulted in Benazzir Bhutto's death. Everyone. Without exception. And that includes my preferred candidiate, John Edwards. No excuses here.

I do think we need two presidents, a co-presidency in the United States: one person to manage domestic affairs and another to handle foreign policy. These two broad areas of governance require very different focus, knowledge and expertise. Just a thought.

[1corona4u]

20. Whatfucking ever....

Oh, yeah, and welcome to the board. You might want to do some searches to find all of the dead horses you mentioned in your ignorant post. They've all been beaten to death. Unless of course, you've already been a part of those discussions before....

Just did a little search on your name, and see that you support Edwards. What a surprise.

1. You never had Joe on your list, so don't bullshit me
2. John Edwards injected HIS ASS into the Pakistan situation yesterday by calling an ambassador to get Musharraf to call him back, and you have the balls to say that Joe is politicizing??

BULLSHIT.

[Munch]

23. Wrong on all counts (well, almost)

1) I support John Edwards but with reservations. Large reservations. If Edwards could actually enact his proposed domestic policy, he might make an exceptional leader IN THAT AREA. Foreign policy? Not so much. Maybe not at all. I worry about that... and the house and the hedge fund and the inconsistencies of his Senate record. You know. All those other dead horses around here.

2) Hence I have not ruled out Barack Obama. Obama, not Edwards, was the subject of my message. I was wondering whether his actions might match his rhetoric. Or not. Who knows? The crystal ball gets a little cloudy these days.

You knew that. You chose to ignore it.

3) Next level, after Edwards and Obama, I was considering Biden (for statesmanship and experience in government) and Kucinich (for consistency and integrity and a well-nigh perfect record on almost every issue -- abortion being the major exception).

But you don't know this BECAUSE you cannot read my mind. I have been wrestling with my feelings about John Edwards -- that much is public knowledge -- and keeping all the rest close to the vest.

4) Joe is politicizing. No question. Why not? He's a politician, has been for 35 years. But under the circumstances, he might have refrained because this politicizing undermines his greatest strength: his reputation for statesmanship. That's why politics is, essentially, such a sad and sorry endeavor. For all of us.

5) John Edwards did indeed insert his proverbial ass into it yesterday by calling that ambassador. There we agree 100 percent. Surprised? "Look at me," said Edwards on LKL -- "I have gravitas. I talked personally with Musharraf. I counseled the man. Musharraf agreed to consider my advice re an independent investigation. Yes. We need transparency."

Um. Whose advice? Oh, yeah. Joe Biden's. Did Edwards appropriate it? Sure. Imitation remains the sincerest form of flattery and doubtless Edwards wants Biden as his Secretary of State (though Biden would probably refuse the offer).

So. I really struggle with voting for John Edwards. And no one has to enlighten me regarding his shortcomings. Like the back of my hand I know them ALL. Obama's, too. In the end it may come down to a protest vote for Dennis Kucinich.

6) Read my sig. Balls? Last time I checked, there were none to be found. People have however complimented me on an attractive set of ovaries (doctors, mainly). Perhaps I should consider joining the "T" part of our LGBT community. If they will have me...

7) Not that it's any of your business, but I have limited funds (very limited) and last week decided to donate to Second Harvest (with a potential match) rather than give the money to DU. So for now, at least, I cannot search the site and this is unfortunate.

You need to understand, sir, that your attitude alienates many people you might otherwise persuade to support your candidate. Doesn't matter with me -- Illinois will go for Obama regardless. But you are hurting the candidate you purport to defend.

Oh, yeah, and thanks for the welcome.

[1corona4u]

24. I'm not going to even read your post...

It's way too long, and most likely filled with more bullshit. Too bad you wasted all of that time on it.

I hate reading books.

[Munch]

28. Your loss then -- but other people will read it for you.

I hate reading books.

Please do not belabor the obvious.

I think we can agree to ignore each other.

[ginchinchili]

22. No one can convince me that Obama would not have voted in favor of the Iraq resolution..

For a guy who is a senator for 2 years then runs for president, he's too ambitious to have risked going against the conventional wisdom on Iraq at the time. No, I can't say with certainty that Obama would have voted in favor of the Iraq resolution, but then I'm not running for president on the claim either. By the same token, Obama cannot say with certainty that he would have voted against the resolution, and yet he IS running for president on the claim. I think it's disingenuous of him and shows that he can't be completely trusted. I understand that he had admitted earlier that he doesn't know how he would have voted, but like Mitt Romney, he's decided the politically advantageous winds had shifted and he shifted with them. I'd be more impressed with the man had remained honest.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

25. You are entitled to your speculation.

But I don't see how you can accuse Obama of being dishonest.

As for Obama saying he wasn't sure how he would have voted, that was during an interview he did at the height of the 2004 election. The reporter was trying to get him to criticize Kerry and Edwards. He said what he did to provide cover for them, to help them get elected. Would you prefer if he'd dissed Kerry and Edwards in that interview?

[Munch]

26. Actually I agree with you.

In other areas as well Obama strikes me as disingenuous. Living in Illinois, I had hoped to support him but it all comes down to trust.

Todd Stroger sticks in my craw. As president of the Cook County Board he could not be more crooked or incompetent. Every week there's a new scandal. And Barack Obama, living on Chicago's south side, had to know how totally unqualified the man was. But endorsed Stroger anyway, with enthusiasm. To get the African American vote, I suppose. That, too, was disingenuous.

So, no, I could not vote for Obama if the election were held tomorrow.

And that's why I hate politics but how do you have a democracy without politics?

It's all a rock and a hard place and my butt hurts.

[jillan]

27. Look at Biden - he is a perfect example.

He was going to vote no.

But because he is the chairman of the SFRC he was called into a meeting before the vote with Bush, Cheney, Condi, Powell - all the usual suspects. Biden told Bush that the only way he would vote yes was if Bush promised him he would exhaust all other options and go to war as a very last resort. Bush looked him in the eye and say he would.

----------------

How does Obama know what would have happened if he was behind closed doors?
It's so easy for me to look at someone else and think what I would do differently if I was them - but you never know how you will act until you are in the same exact situation.

[jillan]

29. It is kind of scary to hear some of the remarks that have been coming out of certain people's mouths

Remove Musharraf? With who?

Start investigations? Yeah - lets shake up Pakistan even more!

Pakistan is ready to explode. We don't need to have a leader that is going to say or do the wrong thing to make it even worse over there. This is not Hollywood, not a stage to perform on - we need to elect a real President, not a candidate.

[Munch]

32. Starting an investigation was Biden's idea...

and I believe a good one.

http://www.joebiden.com/newscenter/pressreleases?id=0264

I know that Benazir’s followers will be tempted to lash out in anger and violence. I urge them to remain calm – and not play into the hands of the forces of destruction. I urge Pakistan’s leaders to open a fully accountable and transparent investigation. We must find out who was behind this and bring those responsible to justice. And the United States should offer any assistance necessary, including investigative teams, to get to the bottom of this horror.

[annie1]

35. yeah, richardson's comment seemed kinda wack. dude's off my list. for sure.

[no name no slogan]

30. I like Joe. But he's treading awfully close here...

He's getting very close to politicizing this-- NOT a good position to be in when it backfires (not if-- WHEN).

Joe's probably got the best foreign policy credentials of any of the candidates, but he runs the risk of coming off as too arrogant by making comments like this.

[Munch]

33. What you said...

I like Joe Biden. Truly. But got angry (for the 50th time since Bhutto's death), really angry, at his arrogant tone -- or at least the implication of arrogance.

I was furious last night, too, at David Axelrod. Obama's guy.

It's the timing -- how can anything NOT be politicized, less than a week from Iowa?

[jillan]

34. Does it bother you about Edwards, and what a hypocrite he is?

How he makes money off of the poor? Invests in off-shore accounts?

How he charges big bucks to tax payer funded Universities to speak there?

How his father was promoted to a supervisor at the Mill after he was one years old?

Before you go after Biden - maybe, just maybe you should take a good, hard look at your candidate....